Support NeoGAF

[NLB2]

I also actually quite liked Tidus. He was optimistic, but he also had his own issues to deal with. So that throws out your brooding character theory. To be honest though, I definitely do prefer characters that brood more.

Either way, Vyse didn't deal with any issues. There was no substance to him. Definition of a 1 dimensional character

He was a confident character who had only a few goals.
1. Save the world
2. Become a legend
Because he isn't a fucking pussy that worries more about the love of some woman than about manly stuff like battling black pirates and upgrading his sweet ride you're gonna knock him? If multidimensional means being a pussy, I'd much prefer a one dimensional character.

 

[speedpop]

Maybe we should all let the critical minds inside ourselves to cool off a bit eh?

Last time I checked, I have been a fan of RPGs since day one and I have always maintained a mental state of taking every one I have played with a grain of salt from the very beginning.

 

[Lazy8s]

SolidSnakex:

Just look at this thread, it's very obvious that a big part of SoA appeal is it's focus on story and characters.

Sure the characters and story were a part of the focus; it's just that they never lost sight of their extraordinary circumstance - being on an epic quest - and didn't get caught up in inter-personal conflicts which tend to overshadow the whole questing aspect.

 

[Tabris]

He was a confident character who had only a few goals.
1. Save the world
2. Become a legend
Because he isn't a fucking pussy that worries more about the love of some woman than about manly stuff like battling black pirates and upgrading his sweet ride you're gonna knock him? If multidimensional means being a pussy, I'd much prefer a one dimensional character.

I'm guessing you also hate Shakespeare's characters too eh?

Screw exploring human emotions and real issues people deal with, it's all about battling black pirates and upgrading your sweet ride :|

God. You're the kind of player that's the exact reason video game storytelling is still so archaic.

 

[Tsubaki]

Alright, so I've done a lousy job of comparing Arcadia to FF7. Perhaps the only thing I can say about that is flash over substance. But I suppose that's a common trait in many games...

outside of megaman battle network (well, i haven't played growlanser yet) i'd rather not. IMO grandia (well, i've mostly played 2) and PDS are incredibly boring games. i've always wanted to give PDS a second shot but i can never bring myself to do so whenever i think back to it. the only thing i liked about it was the battle system and that one town.

Eh I don't know. I don't find Grandia and PDS boring at all. The battles drag out longer than Arcadia or FF battles, this is true. But the reason they're longer is because they are more strategic. I personally would prefer longer battles where I have to think, than mindless short battles. The former makes battles the meat of the game. The latter continues to make them a necessary means to an end (basically, a vehicle in which to level up), without realizing that hey... 80% of the time you play, you're in a battle.

Despite Grandia being way better than its subsequent sequels, if you found Grandia II boring, you wouldn't like Grandia. The only reason I can see it being boring is due to the ease of battles. But if you play every battle strategically, it becomes a lot more fun than just jamming on the A-button. Not sure why you would consider PDS boring aside from non-quick battles. There's lots to explore, and for once it's a random encounter RPG that didn't pester you every few seconds with battles. I suppose it does have a large cinematic-emphasis, but it's one of the few examples where they didn't sacrifice gameplay to do it.

Growlanser is an awesome game though. The game difficulty is tweaked so that you really are forced to use strategy. This is a RPG that you will die in. Not because enemies are massively overpowered, but because you have to formulate a useful strategy. That's why it's beautiful. It's very much a fast-paced SRPG that's done in semi-realtime. It's a shame that 99% of westerners won't ever play it. Growlanser II-III aren't nearly as good.

 

[NLB2]

I'm guessing you also hate Shakespeare's characters too eh?

Screw exploring human emotions and real issues people deal with, it's all about battling black pirates and upgrading your sweet ride :|

God. You're the kind of player that's the exact reason video game storytelling is still so archaic.

No, not at all I love Shakespeare. But can you imagine Squall every saying something like:

How all occasions do inform against me,
And spur my dull revenge! What is a man,
If his chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep and feed? a beast, no more.
Sure, he that made us with such large discourse,
Looking before and after, gave us not
That capability and god-like reason
To fust in us unused. Now, whether it be
Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple
Of thinking too precisely on the event,
A thought which, quarter'd, hath but one part wisdom
And ever three parts coward, I do not know
Why yet I live to say 'This thing's to do;'
Sith I have cause and will and strength and means
To do't. Examples gross as earth exhort me:
Witness this army of such mass and charge
Led by a delicate and tender prince,
Whose spirit with divine ambition puff'd
Makes mouths at the invisible event,
Exposing what is mortal and unsure
To all that fortune, death and danger dare,
Even for an egg-shell. Rightly to be great
Is not to stir without great argument,
But greatly to find quarrel in a straw
When honour's at the stake. How stand I then,
That have a father kill'd, a mother stain'd,
Excitements of my reason and my blood,
And let all sleep? while, to my shame, I see
The imminent death of twenty thousand men,
That, for a fantasy and trick of fame,
Go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot
Whereon the numbers cannot try the cause,
Which is not tomb enough and continent
To hide the slain? O, from this time forth,
My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!

Comparing the writing of whoever translated FFVIII, or any video game I've ever played for that matter, to Shakespeare is laughable.
And comparing a character like Squall to Hamlet (who is the closest Shakespearean character to Squall) is once again laughable. Nobody has ever come close to being as good with characters as Shakespeare.

And how is it that Squall is so multidimensional? I haven't played the game in several years and my memory of it isn't perfect, but I remember Squall acting entirely on one issue alone: "I've been emotionally hurt previously and I want to avoid any other emotional pain in the future, therefore I will prevent myself from becoming attatched to any other human being."

I don't know if you've met anybody like Squall before, but people who've had a very traumatic event in their early childhood are quite often completely defined by their reaction to that traumatic event. A one dimensional character like Squall is very realistic. A one dimensional character like Vyse, though not realistic, is certainly, at least to me, idealistic.

 

[Tabris]

I'm not comparing it to Shakespeare's characters (good choice for the quote by the way).

...but characters in video games will never get to that level, if gamers keep on demanding them to be like Vyse.

Squall was dynamic, and had several sides to him. He at least had layers to him.

Vyse had one. There was no substance to him.

If you keep on demanding characters like Vyse, as a gamer, then there's no chance we'll ever have the level of storytelling and character development that we should.

 

[Tabris]

Why is a character like Vyse, ideal to you?

 

[NLB2]

Squall certainly was dynamic, Vyse not so much. What I was trying to get at was that despite the fact that Squall is a more complex character, I personally don't really want to deal with characters that are as emotionally distraught and as fragile as Squall. While I may agree to an extent that it would do video games, RPGs especially, much good to have more complex characters, I'd much rather take a one dimensional, static character like who is overflowing with enthusiasm and macho bravura than a multidimensional, dynamic character who spends all of his time crying by himself in his bedroom. Oh, and Squall is really annoying because in disk three and four he probably tells to himself "Wow, I've sure changed" at least twenty trillion times.

 

[NLB2]

Why is a character like Vyse, ideal to you?

Because he has little to no emotional baggage. He also has a complete understanding of what he wants and he goes out and gets it. And, he's a pirate

 

[Tabris]

Why is that though?

Do you try to "become the hero" when you play? I know a lot of people do that.

I'm just trying to get your reasoning why you would be fine with reading a book/watching a movie where the character was like Squall, yet when it comes to a video game, you need to play as someone like Vyse.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

I love SOAL just for the ship battles alone. Oh, and the bounty battles kicked ass too, especially against that imposter gang, Vize, Faina, & Anita .

"Feel my fire... Anita Burst!"

 

[ge-man]

Tabris, maybe he wants that because video games are more about fantasy fulfillment than films and books are. You're not passively absorbing the story of a real or fictional someone--you affect the direction of things. Vyse is an attractive protagonist because he never says no to a challenge, and I believe that attitude does affect the enjoyment of the game when comes to fantasy.

I think the interactive nature of video games makes the medium wrong for deep story telling. It's great for themes, but I think the moment people get too serious about scenario and characters you start to suck away that feeling of being in control that makes video games different from other entertainment.

 

[6.8]

Did they rename the characters for the Legends edition???!

 

[NLB2]

Why is that though?

Do you try to "become the hero" when you play? I know a lot of people do that.

I'm just trying to get your reasoning why you would be fine with reading a book/watching a movie where the character was like Squall, yet when it comes to a video game, you need to play as someone like Vyse.

Hey, I never said I liked characters like Squall in other media. I much prefer MacBeth over Hamlet . And its not that I play a video game to be a hero. When playing through SoA:L I felt completely seperated from Vyse, as I did from Squall. Its just that I would much rather witness a heroic character, like Vyse or MacBeth, then a weak, emotional character like Squall or Hamlet.

 

[Shouta]

Growlanser is an awesome game though. The game difficulty is tweaked so that you really are forced to use strategy. This is a RPG that you will die in. Not because enemies are massively overpowered, but because you have to formulate a useful strategy. That's why it's beautiful. It's very much a fast-paced SRPG that's done in semi-realtime. It's a shame that 99% of westerners won't ever play it. Growlanser II-III aren't nearly as good.

The game isn't that hard but you're right in that it does force you to be a bit more strategic in how you play compared to the normal RPG or SRPG.

 

[belgurdo]

Did they rename the characters for the Legends edition???!

against that imposter gang, Vize, Faina, & Anita

Reading is fundamental

 

[6.8]

No it's not.

 

[NLB2]

I love SOAL just for the ship battles alone. Oh, and the bounty battles kicked ass too, especially against that imposter gang, Vize, Faina, & Anita .

"Feel my fire... Anita Burst!"

FUCKiN' A!
Is that why it kept on calling him Vyse the Fallen Pirate?!!!??!! SOAB! I have to fix this terrible wrong.

 

[cubicle47b]

The story was lame and the normal battles were god-awful (thank you lambda burst) but the dungeon, town, and world-designs were great, the music was amazing, and the exploration and discoveries kicked fucking ass (especially after gaining the ability to go to the upper and lower levels of the atmosphere where you could avoid random battles).

It's my favorite RPG this generation although that isn't saying much.

 

[ferricide]

I personally would prefer longer battles where I have to think, than mindless short battles. The former makes battles the meat of the game. The latter continues to make them a necessary means to an end (basically, a vehicle in which to level up), without realizing that hey... 80% of the time you play, you're in a battle.

i like both, honestly. what i hate are long mindless battles. i think suikoden I/II has better battles than grandia II, because there's no reason to exercise the gameplay systems of grandia II. it's easy. that's why i don't like grandia II ... well, and the dungeons are the most boring ever. it's a decent game, i just was well past ready for it to end by the time i gave up on it, after hearing i had at least 10 hours left. it's the rare case of a game where i was instantly really into it but just slowly died off interest completely. usually a game i end up putting down, i was never that into. i was just playing it because it was around. oh well, it's better than lunar 2. =P

i tried to play grandia 1 like 3 times, in both japanese and english, but i could never get interested. i hate the main characters. just because they're kids, yes. the first hour of that game chokes my brain completely.

Not sure why you would consider PDS boring aside from non-quick battles. There's lots to explore, and for once it's a random encounter RPG that didn't pester you every few seconds with battles. I suppose it does have a large cinematic-emphasis, but it's one of the few examples where they didn't sacrifice gameplay to do it.

i hated the exploration in PDS. the dungeons were just big, long, empty, and you had to fly all over the place looking for the next place to go. i have scarcely been so bored. i got sick of the encounters, despite the battles being good, just because of the exploration. also, i wasn't into the story, but i dunno how i'd feel now. i got really sick of the constant voice acting, which i used to hate in RPGs. i don't anymore.

This is a RPG that you will die in. Not because enemies are massively overpowered, but because you have to formulate a useful strategy.

or because WD fucks up the balancing. =)

That's why it's beautiful. It's very much a fast-paced SRPG that's done in semi-realtime. It's a shame that 99% of westerners won't ever play it. Growlanser II-III aren't nearly as good.

i don't really like SRPGs. but it really depends. when i start having to walk people around a map and place them strategically, i get simultaneously frustrated (because i'm not a good tactician) and bored (because it's taking so bloody long and has too much setup.) despite the fact that i find nippon ichi's games appealing, for example, i haven't even bothered trying to play them. i'll probably buy phantom brave, but i doubt i'll end up playing it much.

 

[Shouta]

If WD can adjust Growlanser II and III to be more like I then I'll be a happy warking Chocobo.

And you might like Growlanser in that it's a SRPG (in battle system, it really plays more like a RPG overall) but combat is really brisk and overall strategy is more important than tactics (unlike most Japanese SRPGs where tactics are more important than overall strategy most of the time). It's not too punishing and not too easy which makes it a nice game to kick back too. I probably should finish Growlanser 1 and do that write-up soon.

 

[Asbel]

I'm not comparing it to Shakespeare's characters (good choice for the quote by the way).

...but characters in video games will never get to that level, if gamers keep on demanding them to be like Vyse.

Squall was dynamic, and had several sides to him. He at least had layers to him.

Vyse had one. There was no substance to him.

If you keep on demanding characters like Vyse, as a gamer, then there's no chance we'll ever have the level of storytelling and character development that we should.

Tabris, FF games sells 20x that of SoA. What are you talking about!?